- (1.) Prem Lata Dhingra (widow), Suneel Dhingra (son), Harish Dhingra (minor son) and Manjoo Dhingra, (minor daughter) of Rajinder Kumar Dhingra (since deceased) have brought this appeal against judgment dated 22.7.1987, passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur, (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"), whereby their claim petition for seeking a compensation in the sum of Rs. 10,00,000, on account of death of said Rajinder Kumar Dhingra, which took place in a vehicular accident on 17.7.1986, in the area of Police Station, Tanda, District Hoshiarpur, was dismissed.
(2.) Brief facts, culminating to the commencement of this appeal, may be recapitulated thus: On 17.7.1986, at about 1.00 p.m., Rajinder Kumar Dhingra, aged about 49 years, was going on his scooter, bearing No. DEM-7701 towards his house. When he was just near his Cold Storage at Garhdiwala, he slowed down his scooter for taking a turn towards the right-side on the kacha road. At that time, a bus bearing No. PNH-8144 of Punjab Roadways, Hoshiarpur Depot, driven by respondent No. 3, Meet Singh, came from the side of Hoshiarpur. The bus was being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 3. It struck against the scooter, as a result of which, Rajinder Kumar Dhingra fell down at some distance. In the accident, he sustained multiple injuries and ultimately expired on 20.7.1986. The accident was witnessed by Harbhajan Singh (AW-7) and Mukhtiar Singh son of Harnam Singh of Village Hirpur, District Hoshiarpur. It was also averred in the claim petition that the Punjab Roadways authorities, in connivance with the police officials, also managed to get a false report recorded on the statement allegedly made by the deceased, which in fact, was never made by him and, thus, no criminal case could be got registered against the bus driver. The claimant-appellants (hereinafter referred to as "the appellants") in their claim petition, sought a total compensation of Rs. 10.00 lacs by giving the details pertaining to the income of the deceased.
(3.) Upon notice, the respondents appeared and they filed their respective written statements, wherein, they denied the allegations of the appellants. However, the occurrence of the accident at the given place and time was admitted. At the same time, it was averred that the accident in question occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the scooterist (deceased). As no criminal case was registered against the bus-driver, therefore, it was claimed that the appellants were not entitled to any compensation.;